WHERE DOES ONE BEGIN ?

Where does one begin? The last couple of weeks have been as deplorable as ever.  The most appalling event being the continuing support for Donald Trump for a return of his presidency of the United States. What can the American citizens be thinking? His story at his trial was a non-denial denial, not even given under oath and mouthed to the press by his mindless supporters of republican party representatives. How these people ever got elected to the Senate or House of representatives is unbelievable.

 

Twelve ordinary citizens of New York City, chosen and approved by his lawyers and consequently by himself, chose not to believe his babbling denials and instead concentrated on the only evidence they had before them. That he was lying without giving evidence was glaringly obvious. To claim afterwards that he wanted to give evidence is so clearly a lie, that it beggars belief his supporters accept his nonsense. If he had really wanted to give evidence, he would have done so. Since when has he ever followed anyone’s ‘advice’? Is it any wonder he was found guilty?

 

Yet two days after his conviction he manages to fund raise over $35 million. Why does this avowed rich man need funding? He claims he is so rich he does not have to answer to anyone. So why are his simple down to earth MAGA base sending him their hard earned cash? What is so wrong with the citizenry of the United States of America? Have they all become stupid and unable to think?

 

I recently read an opinion piece in the Los Angeles Times wherein the writer comments on people with low level knowledge of politics, who tend to shy away from political debate and rely on their general feelings about the state of the nation, or rather are more concerned with their own individual lives, trials and tribulations and feel a sense of neglect by the State. These are the disaffected who make up his Maga base and apparently they are legion in the US.

 

From what I can make out, they rally to what can only be decribed as a demagogue who prefaces his remarks to the nation by claiming foreign states are sending their convicted criminals and mental defectives to the United States. They are pouring in and taking over the country, he claims, from South America and Africa no less. The atrocity of these remarks is unquestionable and yet he is believed by sufficient numbers to place him in poll position to be elected President. Not one of the so called educated elected representative of the Republican Party in Congress has disputed this outrageous nonsense, or even attempted to downgrade its terrifying implications. What is wrong with these people?

 

As to the article in the Los Angeles Times (which unfortunately I have not been able to find again) I find, on reflection, that the author was attempting to excuse the stupidity of a large uneducated and ignorant section of American society without causing offence. He was also of the view that most people had already formed very firm views about how they will vote or who thy might support. There was however a sufficient number of undecided voters who would probably only make their decision on the day or not vote at all. Hence the serious problem facing us all.

 

What is even more extraordinary is the number of politicians who railed with real feeling and vehemence against the lies and distortions of a Donald Trump presidency before the 2016 election and who now give him unconditional support. One can find them easily on YouTube expressing their before and after views, which are cringemaking. How is it possible that Niki Haley, a one-time candidate vilified by Trump, can possibly claim she will vote for him in November? Have they not heard themselves speak before? Do they suffer from trans global amnesia?

 

In the meantime, the United Kingdom has chosen the American Independence Day celebrations of July the 4^th to elect its next Parliament. 650 individuals will put themselves forward for election on that day. The leader of the party with the most elected representatives will be appointed Prime Minister. He will choose a cabinet whose responsibility will be to manage how the state will provide for the security, physical, mental and economic health and education of 67 million odd citizens.   That means that each representative will be responsible for some 103,000 citizens in their constituency, with approximately 73,000 who are registered to vote in each constituency. It is an enormous duty and obligation to have the interests of so many in their hands. Likewise it is an equally serious responsibility on behalf of the citizen to vote for the person most likely to fulfil that obligation. It is therefore imperative that there should be no voter in the low level knowledge category as in the United States.

 

I cannot be certain that that is the case; however, so far as one can tell, there is a plurality of electors leaning towards the Labour Party in the United Kingdom. Whether that will remain the case over the next 5 weeks is the question. Do not forget that there are some candidates in this general election who would actually welcome Donald Trump as President of the United States. How insane is that? As I stated at the outset, where does one begin?

NATIONAL SERVICE

 We have been here before

CAN WE HANDLE THE TRUTH ?

In his current trial in New York, Donald Trump has clearly been convicted by various sections of the media, in particular MSNBC by various pundits. Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O’Donnell, Ari Melber and others.  There has been a plethora of ‘forensic’ examinations of the prosecution evidence. Tape recordings and paper exhibits explained in great detail. I do not know whether the members of the jury, whose decision is the only one that matters, have access to any of these broadcasts or publications, but if they have, it could be cause for concern.

Despite all this, from what I have been able to glean, the question is, does all this stuff add up nothing more than Mr Trump paying legal bills in the ordinary course of business, or can one infer from all the activity, a criminal conspiracy? It will all depend on whether the jury are prepared to give Mr Trump the benefit of the doubt. Will they believe him, or whatever witnesses his defence team may call, that he was just paying for legal services?

 

As to the members of the jury believing Mr Trump, sadly, the real test is whether or not they believe him when he so loudly proclaims he never had sex with Ms Daniels. The problem he faces is that if they think he has lied about that, they will be less willing to believe him about anything else.  That’s only human nature. A man who has bragged about his fame and ability to have any woman he wants, does not have the best credentials to persuade a New York Manhattan jury.

 

In addition, it is highly unlikely that Mr Trump will give evidence on oath and subject himself to cross examination. If he doesn’t, then the Jury will most certainly think “Why not?”. If he does (and I’m sure his lawyers are terrified he will) then a careful and extended cross examination will surely reveal his character. If he reacts to questions that he feels impugn him or are contrary to his thinking, he may resort to insult and verbal abuse as he does when questioned by the press he hates. His childish and neolithic bravura will come out. His psychotic narcissism will be exposed. The scene might not be quite as dramatic as Jack Nicholson’s portrayal of Col. Nathan R. Jessep in A Few Good Men, but will be just as telling. The equivalent of shouting out “You’re God damned right I did!”

 

Indeed, given the verdict in the lawsuits brought against him by Ms E. Jean Carroll, despite his denials and his video defence, the unanimous jury clearly did not believe him. So, as far as the present members of the jury are concerned, there is precedent relating to his sexual conduct and denials.

 

In any event we will no doubt soon find out just who can handle the truth or not, as the case may be. He will either get away with it again, or finally be brought to book. If he does get away with it, we will all have to handle it.

LET RIGHT BE DONE

A correction must be made to the information about University of Chicago Law School. At the time of my visit in February of 1965, Chicago was the premier Law School in the United States. When I mentioned the list, I should have specified Stanford and Yale were tied for 1^st place, Chicago 3^rd followed by Duke and Harvard tied for 4^th place. Chicago, however, so far as I am aware, has, for a long time, been above Harvard in the rankings of Law Schools. It would appear that Harvard has had better press.

 

The ratings of Law Schools in the United States is a rather mixed bag. It would seem that two schools ranked number 1 for Trial Advocacy are Temple University (Beasley) in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (ranked 54 the overall) and Stetson University, Gulfport, Florida (ranked 98^th overall).

 

Speaking of standings and ranks, Todd Blanche is the lawyer defending Mr Trump in his current case in New York. Mr Blanche attended the Brooklyn Law School in New York which is ranked at number 114 of best law schools and at number 52 in trial advocacy. It is curious that Mr Trump is seeking a second term in the White House which is Maison Blanche. Let us hope the only invitation he gets to Maison Blanche is Todd’s apartment for supper. Todd, by the way, would appear not to be doing too well with the judge. Ho Hum.

 

Trump’s asides to camera as he goes in and out of court show an extraordinary petulance that one would have thought people grew out of. His infantile outbursts and language reinforce the view that he has never quite grown up. Perhaps his narcissism and peevishness speak more of infantile behaviour and retarded development than psychosis?  He has limited vocabulary and his humour is of the playground. He has the sticks and stones persona or the schoolyard bully.

 

It is something that makes me ponder. I heard an interview this morning on Radio 4.s program Life Changing between Dr Sian Williams and Tier Blundell. The blurb reads:

 

Tier Blundell was never a bad kid, he was bright and curious but also disruptive. He grew up sandwiched between two cultures and felt excluded from society. Those feelings were amplified when aged 11 Tier was informed by his school that he wouldn’t be welcome back following the summer holidays and was instead sent to a Pupil Referral Unit. He left there with no qualifications and a sense of shame, until the day he puts on a suit, turns up for an unscheduled meeting and demands another go at education —

 

During his childhood he probably exhibited symptoms of ADHD and hyperactivity. He was mixed race and suffered racist abuse and wad generally regarded as a trouble maker. As a child he keenly felt a strong sense of injustice at his lot and the resultant frustration caused his outbursts of violence, theft and disruptive behaviour. After leaving the Referral Unit he had a variety of jobs, as a bouncer and also got into cage fighting.

 

When he was 24, after a difficult childhood he was without qualification he put on a suit and went to a college, with no appointment, and spoke to someone about getting back into education. He was accepted. From that time on he never looked back and set about learning how to learn and how to educate himself getting a degree from Warwick University and now being a DPhil student at Lincoln College, Oxford University.  

 

Hearing him talk about his early school years between 5 and11 and the referral unit till 15/16 it was clear that, like most children, his resentment resulted from feelings of isolation and being the boy to blame. A lot of stuff was put on him, that had nothing to do with him, but he was the bad boy. That feeling of injustice, of being hard done by, and the need for some retribution or revenge to compensate for his grievances was what led to the attitude and antisocial conduct. He may not have realised it at the time, but listening to him speak now, about his feelings at the time stuck a chord.

 

I believe from a very early age people have a strong sense of what should be right. It’s like learning a language. It’s part of how we speak. Growing up we navigate the world using that sense of what is just and how we relate with others. The simplicity of right and wrong is no accident. It is that sense of equity that has driven the establishment of the rule of law. I am a firm believer in that rule. How often have we heard a child left out of something call out “That’s not fair” and having to explain why some things might not be fair, or having to explain that they had already had their share and to give someone else a chance. Indeed the child might be operating on an untruth and need to be taught their mistake and how to accept it. That is what growing up is all about, learning what is true, what is right and what is wrong. Some people do not seem to adjust. which is why we have vendettas and wars.

 

Real injustice or behaviour perceived as injustice can cause deep resentment. When that sense injustice, real or imagined, manifest itself in violence. The victims of that action, so far as humanity is concerned, is entitled to defend him or herself, or react in such a way as to reflect an appropriate response or find some means of rectifying or compensating the hurt. Too often it leads to an acceleration of the violence. Rules therefore have been set up by individuals societies to enable them to interact in peace. The rights and equities between parties is set down. Call it the rule of law, human rights, or simply good manners, whatever, it is vitally important to keep the peace.  

 

I am sure this is something we have built into our brains and just as we learn language we learn what is right. If our learning is impaired through bad education or teaching, or we are educationally challenged, then there is no growth and no real understanding of equity and justice.

 

Mr Trump is just such a retard. His infantilism has been pandered to his whole life, leaving him ill-equipped to deal with anything that does not suit him and he expresses disdain and insult, like a child feeling it hasn’t got its own way. No one seems able to explain it to him like he’s a six year old, because he is a six year old unwilling to listen. He has not got beyond the mirror stage in life. All he sees is himself. End of. Those who adore and pander to him are indeed the same. They all play in the same sand box, only Trump is on top of the slide. They have no idea of what will happen when he comes crashing down on top of them. Unfortunately it might spill over on to the rest of us, and this is the man to whom a so called Supreme Court is contemplating giving total immunity.  What world are we lining in? As Joan Rivers often said “We have to talk. GROW UP !!’

 

A little something extra that perhaps the promoters of the Rwanda policy might ponder.  A bit racist in tone, but it fits the bill of,  Let Right be Done.

 

Fiat Justitia ruat caelum. Meaning “Let justice be done though the heavens fall”. The maxim signifies the belief that justice must be realized regardless of consequences. It was cited in the case of Somerset -v- Stewart from 1772 98ER499. The judgement of the English Court of King’s Bench relating to the right of an enslaved person on English Soil not to be forcibly removed from the country and sent to Jamaica for sale.

 

According to one reported version of the case, Lord Mansfield decided that:

The state of slavery is of such a nature that it is incapable of being introduced on any reasons, moral of political, but only by positive law, which preserves its force long after the reasons occasions, and time itself from whence it was created, is erased from memory. It is so odious that nothing can be suffered to support it, but positive law. Whatever inconveniences, therefore, may follow from the decision, I cannot say this case is allowed or approved by the law of England, and therefore the black must be discharged.

 

A VIEW FROM THE WHAT IS NOW THE FRONT

I receive this email comment in respect of my previous blog from Bob in California. He is an old friend and graduate of the third listed best law school in the United States, the University of Chicago. It is just off the Midway Pleasance in South Chicago. I visited him there in February of 1965. We were together on the 21^st February 1965 on the day Malcolm X was assassinated in New York.  The Nation of Islam’s Temple No:2 was located only a few blocks to the north on South Greenwood Avenue, a mere 4 minute drive away. I recall that I was in need of some aspirin and we drove around to find a convenient drug store. I seem to recall, we passed by the Nation of Islam  residence, very heavily guarded in the light of expected repercussions due to the event in New York earlier in the day. The building was later revealed to have been under surveillance by the FBI during the sixties. Just a bit of historical background. Herewith his comments.

 

“Well, Ed, here’s the scoop on the Court.  Trump appointed three “justices”, all of whom were put up by the Federalist Society, a right wing organization run by Leonard Leo. The organization cultivates their candidates through college/law school and ultimately into the judiciary. The Society is funded by right-wing billionaires, who continue to wine and dine their justices once on the Court with lavish vacations and other gifts, including a very expensive motor home ultimately given to Justice Clarence Thomas. Not counting Roberts, there are 5 of these right-wing hacks on the Court, who will do the bidding of the supporters of the Society, who consider it in their best interests if a Republican is elected to the Presidency. One of the billionaires is a Nazi memorabilia collector!

So, if you are looking for any real legal reasoning for any of their decisions, save your eyesight. It’s all political. Problem is that in order to impeach any of them, it would take a majority of the US House of Reps to vote for the impeachment petition, and 2/3 of the US Senate to remove a justice. So, they act without any ethics rules that bind them to be honest, and instead act in the interests of their patrons.

Thanks to Trump, we’re stuck with these posers.

 

I did not know that Frank Morgan was on the Court at one time. Apparently, being the Wizard of Oz was a prerequisite! Who knew?”

 

That February of 1965 saw one of the severest snow storms in the Midwest. I can’t remember exactly which Hall of Residence Bob lived in. It might have been Goodspeed or Wieboldt Hall or neither. Whatever it was, it was very cold and heated by very old fashion radiators that sucked all the humidity out of the air. I drove off back to LA the next day and was caught in a snowstorm in the Ozarks on what is now, and maybe then, Highway 44. Somewhere between St Louis and Springfield Missouri, the windscreen wipers on the car could only sweep across 4 or 5 inches of windscreen there was so much snow. A short while later the car just stopped and was apparently dead.. I was fortunate in that it was at a crossroads near a gas station and got a tow from a guy at the station who had been pulling cars off the road practically all day. Once under cover in the garage I could see the car was covered in a sheet of ice and there were blocks of ice around the wheels with about a millimetre of space between the ice and the tyre. Effectively I had been driving in a block of ice for some time.  It came to a halt because the petrol had frozen in the carburettor, also encased in ice. I took off quite a while later when things were a bit clearer and the ice cube round the car had melted. The deluge had stopped and there were clear skies. A bit further down the road though the highway itself was completely covered in a sheet of black ice and the car spun round 360 degrees. I had noted a number of HGVs jack-knifed on the side of the highway on my way. I managed to pull off at a place called “The Oasis Motel”. 

 

But all that’s another story. Indeed the United States is full of stories but none, at the moment, as important as what is happening to the rule of law. I thank Bob for his comments and wish they were more optimistic in tone. Perhaps it is just another conspiracy theory, but it sounds quite plausible to me. 

 

Herewith a current promotional film for the Law School and its surrounds:

 

THE SUPINE COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

What is wrong with the citizens of the United States of America? The greatest threat to their entire existence as a democracy is taking place within its Supreme Court. That they should even be considering the question of total immunity for the President is unspeakable. Ruminating over the matter and listening to the outrageous and ludicrous arguments put forward by Mr Trump’s attorneys surely should make them cringe with embarrassment. That any self-respecting officer of any court in any democracy in the entire world should even contemplate such preposterous nonsense, for even a millisecond, is a disgrace.  

 

That there should even be a hearing is an outrage and that the justices should retire to consider the matter is indicative of a loss of dignity and respect for the office they hold. They have been reduced to a sham court. The very notion of referring to themselves as Supreme is at rock bottom. They are as base as they come for allowing this farrago of absurdity to continue, knowing full well what they are doing is allowing their protégé to evade the justice he deserves. What else can Mr Trump be but their puppet master? They have no shame. If ever a group of justices forswore credibility the Most Inferior and Worst Court of the United States has been supreme in the endeavour.

 

Whilst students rage, across campuses all over the United States, against the horrors in Palestine, on the assumption that the United States has the power to bring matters to a swift conclusion, they ignore the very grave possibility that the United States will cease to exist as a democratic state with any influence whatsoever. Indeed why are there no equally vocal demonstrations taking place at every law school from Stanford, Yale, Chicago, Duke, Harvard, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Columbia, New York, Northwestern, Michigan, Berkeley, Los Angeles, Cornell, Georgetown, Minnesota and Texas? These are the top seventeen ranking campuses listed under Best Law Schools 2024 and cover the country.  There are, apparently, 16,810 full time students enrolled at these institutions at the present time, plus another 2800 part time. That’s 19000 silent voices. What about the practicing legal profession?  Are there no dissenters to this charade taking place as we speak/write? This insanity should be making real headlines across the country instead of just another story on the News.

 

What can possibly be supreme about the current Supreme Court of the United States? Nul Point partout. 

This film might be a reminder:

 

A NOD TO NUMEROLOGY

Apart from Guy Fawkes and the Gunpowder Plot, on the 5th November 1605 there are a few times when the marking of the event coincides with presidential elections in the United States on the first Tuesday in November (excluding the 1^st November being All Saints Day).  Whether that is an ominous circumstance or a fortuitous omen is yet to be seen.

 

So far as the United States is concerned, the first coincidence occurred on Tuesday 5^th November 1776, the year of the birth of the country and the Declaration of Independence. Tuesday the 5^th November occurs once every 28 years, save for a period between 1872 and 1912 when it took 40 years to come round. The next Tuesday 5^th November in an election year will be 2052, followed by 2080, then another period of 40 years to 2120, if the United States is still in existence.

 

Following on from 1776, the first actual presidential election in the United States occurring on the 5^th November was in 1816 with the election of James Monroe who was in the Democratic-Republican Party. The Democratic-Republican Party, was the first opposition political party in the United States. Organized in 1792 as the Republican Party, its members held power nationally between 1801 and 1825. It was the direct antecedent of the present Democratic Party. Monroe was the fifth President and was responsible for the Monroe Doctrine, a warning to European Nations against intervening in the Western Hemisphere. Stay out of the American continent.

 

The next election of Tuesday the 5^th November was in 1844. James Knox Polk a Democrat and the 11^th President. He was actually born on the 2^nd November 1795 and so was just 49 when elected. During his term of office the United States fought the Mexican War (1846-48) acquiring the territories along the Pacific coast and southwest.

 

On Tuesday 5^th November 1872, Ulysses S. Grant won a second term as the 18^th President. He served with distinction in the Mexican-American War and eventually led the Union Army to victory in the American Civil War accepting General Lee’s surrender at Appomattox. He was born Hiram  Ulysses Grant on 27^th of April 1822.  His father, Jesse Grant wrote to Representative Thomas L Hamer requesting that he nominate Ulysses to the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York. Hamer nominated 17-year-old Ulysses to West Point in spring 1839. Grant was accepted on July 1. Unfamiliar with Grant, however, Hamer submitted an incorrect name. As a result, Grant was enlisted at West Point under the name "U. S. Grant". As the initials "U. S." also stood for "Uncle Sam", he became known amongst army colleagues as "Sam".

 

Of his achievements in office, on March 18, 1869, Grant signed into law equal rights for black people, to serve on juries and hold office, in Washington D.C., and in 1870 he signed the Naturalization Act that gave foreign black people citizenship.

 

The next election of Tuesday  5^th November was in 1912  when Woodrow Wilson, Democrat, was elected as the 28^th President. He was the leading advocate for the League of Nations and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919. He served two terms as president. 

 

The next Tuesday 5^th November election was in 1940 with the 32^nd President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s election to a third term in office. Also a democrat. He was responsible for the New Deal which brought the country out of the great depression, along with the National Recovery Administration. Major surviving programs and legislation implemented under Roosevelt include the Securities and Exchange Commission, the National Labour Relations Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Social Security. His influence and leadership during the Second World war is to be noted.

 

There then comes the turbulent year of 1968 with the election of the 37^th President Richard Milhous Nixon of the Republican Party on Tuesday 5th November. Along with Henry Kissinger he opened diplomatic relations with China and concluded the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Leonid Brezhnev. General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Soviet Union. On the 26^th May 1972.  In that year of 1972, on the 17^th of June, five men were caught breaking into the Democratic party headquarters at the Watergate complex in Washington, D.C. This led to the exposure of various nefarious activities within Mr Nixon’s administration and his eventual resignation from Office on the 9^th August 1974.

 

The last election to be held on a Tuesday 5^th November was in 1996, with the second election of the 42^nd President, Bill Clinton of the Democratic Party. He was born William Jefferson Clinton on the 19^th August 1946 in Hope, Arkansas. Clinton made various moves towards a national health care plan and some control over the possession of firearms, signing into law the Bray Bill in 1993 which mandated federal background checks on people who purchase firearms in the United States. The law also imposed a five-day waiting period on purchases.  He also expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, a subsidy for low-income workers. A time line of his presidency can be found at:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Bill_Clinton_presidency.

 

A very fictional portrayal of his presidential campaign, Primary Colors was written by Joe Klein, political commentator and author, and made into a movie staring John Travolta, Emma Thompson, Adrian Lester and Kathy Bates and many others.  Well worth a view.

 

The next election to be held on Tuesday  5^th November is in this year of elections 2024. This is the eighth time the coincidence has occurred. The first coincidence was during the birth of the nation.  Apart from the aberration of Richard Nixon in 1968 every other election has been won by the democratic party. If the omens are correct, it would appear to be a 7 to 1 chance that Mr Biden will be re-elected. Also if the problems arising from Mr Nixon’s election, such as the skulduggery of his subordinates, is in any way comparable to Mr Trumps criminal activities yet to be discovered (and I would be willing to wager there are some) then the electorate would be well advised to vote for someone other than Mr Trump. Just about anybody would be better.

 

So do we believe in fortuitous omens on the left, or ominous predictions from the right? Does some form of numerology apply in these circumstances? It would be nice to think that the omens are strongly in favour of Mr Biden, given the history of Tuesday the 5^th November in the United States.  As to Guy Fawkes, the 5^th  November 1605 was a Saturday.

DOES TRUMP WEAR A TRUSS ?

An interesting discussion on the problems of democracy on Radio 4’s Start The Week this morning. Tom Sutcliffe and guests explored the state of democracy. The political philosopher Erica Benner, anthropologist Alpa Shah and Bobby Duffy, director of Policy Institute at King’s College London, discussed the questions of ordinary citizens keeping democracy alive, how far democratic institutions are failing in India despite its long history of ancient councils of elders, whether faith in democracy still exists and the idea of Citizen Assemblies becoming more popular.

 

The discussion quite naturally centred on each individual guest’s current research as discussed in their latest books. Ms Benner’s was of a more general nature than the other two. En passant, discussion quite naturally mentioned the current state of affairs in the United States. This is a country that is becoming more and more undemocratic in its outlook in that, apparently, 36% of the population want an authoritarian or strong leader......(Mon 14 April 2024)

 

I had to break off from the above as I was diverted by other domestic matters. There are priorities to be dealt with; however, on waking this morning much of the news is taken up with Liz Truss’s memoir and an interview she gave to Chris Mason, political editor of BBC News. She is a complete disaster living in some world of her own. Why is she being given a platform to disgorge her nonsense?

 

She has declared support for Donald Trump for President of the United States. She claimed the world was safer under Trump. She claimed the world was "on the cusp of very, very strong conflict" and needed "a strong America more than ever". She also claimed that Trump was a supporter of Ukraine’s fight with the Russians, despite the fact that Trump’s acolytes in Congress are resisting paying for any more weapons for Ukraine. Trump has openly declared his admiration of Putin as has his strong supporter Marjorie Taylor Greene. How is it she sees and hears the opposite. On what planet is she living?

 

According to Mason, Ms. Truss argues “The environmental debate is ‘the single greatest example of Conservatives over the last few decades losing arguments to the left’ and claims plenty of environmentalists are watermelons – green on the outside. Red (i.e. socialists) on the inside. She argues the greatest threat to the environment is the “rise of authoritarian regimes”.

 

I presume she sees herself as a threat to the environment, since she is clearly a strong supporter of any authoritarian regime in that she wants to overturn the Human Rights Act, scrap the Supreme Court and dismantle the Judicial Appointments Commission, stating judicial appointments should lie with elected politicians.

 

How can any sane Western European politician support a man who is a proven liar, without a shred of integrity, already found wanting for deception and libel, and facing serious racketeering charges to which some of his co-defendants have already pleaded guilty. Any person with simple common sense hearing the telephone call between Mr Trump and an election official, wherein he tries to cajole and subtilely threaten said official to falsify the election results, would find it difficult to support this man. To, on the one hand, claim that the rise of authoritarian regimes are a threat, and to openly recommend an avowed authoritarian narcissist, is indicative of a serious mental disorder. Again, why is this person being given a platform?

 

Like Mr Trump she is a firm believer that her glaring failures are not of her own making but caused by others who have deliberately conspired against her. For Ms Truss, it is all “their” fault, whoever they may be. Civil Servants, bankers, economists and all those lefty lawyers, are collectively to blame for her inability to be the head of State she saw herself to be. Mr Trump has his own version of the same blame game. The difference is that very few in the United Kingdom believe her, and tragically for the world and the United States, too many American citizens believe him.

 

So much for the problems of democracy.

ON BECOMING DISENGAGED

I find myself in limbo. It is more of a feeling than an actual place, yet it is very much a state of being. This state where I am in, is probably the only place in which I have some control, although it is a state in which no control is required. The state of limbo is, I am quite sure, occupied by many people, and because it is so populace, we cannot see each other, although as we go about outside our homes, we occasionally recognise a fellow citizen of limbo from a comment they may make or from a look in their eye.  Some people deliberately go there and others, like myself, just find themselves there. It is a gradual shift, a sort of disengagement. It’s not stopping the world, but it is, sort of,  getting off it.

 

The French verb and phrase se dégager comes to mind.  It is a very useful and succinct way of expressing separation. It is useful for telling people politely to go away.  ‘Dégage!’ or, ‘Je me dégage’ is often heard in French films, usually spoken by some surly youth. In any event it is a passport to limbo. Je suis dégagé, or more correctly - Je suis désengagé.

 

This state of being disconnected is brought about by the endless frustration of repeatedly complaining about the state of the world and realising that one has no influence or power to do anything about it. Most of us are not politicians or public servants who are tasked by our governments to improve the situation and bring about co-operation and rational thinking. The desire to create a healthy, prosperous and peaceful existence, full of the joys and beauty of life, is clearly the main goal of our elected representatives; yet, the finding of common ground and equality is just as elusive as it has ever been.

 

Our democratic state tells us that each and every one of our votes is vital and will have great effect and bearing on our future as a result of the representatives we elect. So get out and vote. That is your power as an individual citizen. Even better, if you care so much, have the energy and the will, put yourself forward as well.

 

Not so easy, and one must have a powerful ambition to lead.  There’s the rub. Looking around the world, the calibre and quality of current leaders, and some prospective leaders, in powerful office is dismal. There are few democracies around the world where voting has any chance of bringing about real change or at least preventing a monumental political disaster. Most of the EU, the United Kingdom and North America, have had for some time (so I believe) fair and honest elections. There may be others, but there is no doubt that the coming election in the United States in November is of vital importance. Were the entire western world to have a vote then the outcome could possibly be predicted, but the vote is limited to citizens of the United States, and judging by the interviews one is exposed to over various parts of the media, the very possibility of a second Trump administration is cause for extreme anxiety.

 

As I do not have a vote I am disengaged from the process. I am disengaged from voting in all elections around the world, save the United Kingdom. Given the mode of elections in the UK, the only vote I have is to vote in the London Borough of Lambeth and Greater London. As to that, there are three Labour MPs for Lambeth, all of whom have solid Labour majorities. In a general election I can only vote in the Vauxhall Constituency.  As to more local government in Lambeth, that too is solidly Labour and my vote is limited to the Oval Ward of the constituency. My vote therefore is limited. I can vote for some local representatives directly but have no actual vote for the Prime Minister. I am in effect disconnected from the choice of leader.

 

Is it any wonder that I am in the state of limbo. There is the fiction in the United Kingdom that voters are electing a particular party to govern the country, and that it is the leader of the party who commands the vote of the electorate. It is through the leader that the voters elect a party representative, no matter what that representative is like. There is the assumption that all of a political party’s choice of representatives are merely cyphers. The fact that they are individuals does not matter. They are labels one votes for. Is that it? Is that how we are meant to vote? Vote for a party not the individual? We are voters without any say in when and how we have a general election, or any election for that matter. Voting for individuals makes little impact. Is it any wonder that I am disengaged.

 

There is of course the age old remark (not attributable to any one person) “If voting changed anything, it would be abolished”; however, I am not advocating abandoning the concept of voting. It is or can be a useful method of establishing the will and priorities of the majority, but that must be tempered with some care for the wishes and preferences of minorities. Universal suffrage is exactly that, and how we suffer in the doing of it. There is no one anywhere who does not, at some point in their lives, express a political opinion, some view as to how, where and when it is appropriate to behave in a specific way - in a manner that is generally deemed to be the most appropriate and least offensive - the most diplomatic. Overthinking this politically correct approach to life has led to much mirth and satire. It is not necessarily without merit. Careful and respectful communication can be very effective. And yet…

 

I know that I am not alone in the state of limbo. We can rage against the violence and mayhem in Ukraine, the Middle East, Myanmar, Yemen etc. We can listen to and watch intrepid reporters showing us and analysing the daily horrors, but can do nothing actually to stop it. Giving aid and sympathy to the grief stricken and the victims on the ground is laudable, but it is not stopping the carnage. Indeed the incessant and insistent news is never out of mind. How do I stop the constant internal screaming in my brain,  “STOP THIS INSANITY!”?  Is it any wonder that I am becoming disengaged?

YET MORE CRAP

I have been silent for a couple of weeks owing to the rather depressing nature of things around the world. Whilst some areas of the globe are actively engaged in violence and horrific death, elsewhere there appears to be stagnation. Western leaders make forceful statements indicating their displeasure at what is going on, but seem powerless to have any influence whatsoever.  Why does Mr Netanyahu not listen to Mr Biden et al. in the United States? Why is Mr Sunak hesitating on not supplying further weapons to the State of Israel?

 

According to UK defence export statistics for 2022 published on 17^th November 2023, by the Department of UK Defence and Security Exports, the United Kingdom had sold, on average, £4.5 Billion a year of defence exports to the Middle East alone, since 2017. That’s £22.5 bn in the last 5 years.  The same department claims that the United States has defence exports to the rest of the world of over $200 bn in the last five years. Clearly wars make money, and given a country’s requirements for funding its own welfare, business and security, that amount of income is hard to turn away from. Just how much of that trade stays in private hands or into the state coffers is another matter.

 

There is a hint of hypocrisy in summoning Israeli ambassadors to account for the IDF’s current admitted horrific mistake in killing British and international aid workers. What can possibly rectify such an error? What sort of compensation can be made and who will provide it? What is the point of the useless huffing and puffing of Foreign Secretaries, Secretaries of State, Presidents and Prime Ministers? We are no nearer a solution.

 

People have demonstrated throughout the world as well as in Israel itself to stop the war, indeed to stop all wars; yet, we have political stagnation. Our elected representatives seem unable to act and carry out the will of the people. What is the problem? What planet are we living on?

 

From what I see on YouTube and other media, those American citizens about to vote in November, appear more concerned with stopping immigration at the Mexican Border and giving support to a justly indicted blowhard attempting to bully his way into the presidency. How does he have the gall to say “There’s gonna be a bloodbath if I don’t get elected”? What has happened to America? Why is he still not on trial? How can the Judiciary allow such delay? For God’s sake America, get a grip!

 

As to the United Kingdom, the current Prime Minister is on a treadmill to Rwanda, in the belief that by some miracle his party’s inadequacy will disappear. He no longer sees the harm and damage he is causing the country with his stagnating terminal government. It is at the end of its tether. Why must we be dragged down with it?  He scoffs when asked ‘when will there be an election?’. Surely he must realise it’s what the people of this country desperately want. Why is he being so obtuse?

 

The country’s economy is all over the place. The saddest part is the poverty it is causing and the mendacity of businesses and companies taking advantage of the situation to increase their profits at the expense of the average citizen. Banker’s bonuses are no longer open to scrutiny; water companies having caused major damage and pollution, whilst pocketing huge dividends, now seek to increase prices to supposedly invest in cleaning up their mess; insurance companies are now charging exorbitant fees claiming increased risk owing to inflation.

 

In particular vehicle insurance is going through the roof, so to speak. In order to have a vehicle on the road, of any kind, there is a legal requirement that the driver be insured. This gives insurance companies virtually carte blanche to charge what they like. Owing to the increased expenditure now involved in settling the smallest claim, the cost of comprehensive insurance has skyrocketed to extortionate levels. It is as if the insurance companies are making drivers provide them with the full amount of any claim they might make down the line so that all the company has to do is settle the claim by giving the customer their own money back. They have become a sort of saving banks for road users. Save up for your own compensation and if you don’t make a claim, well thank you very much. The state is allowing insurance companies to charge you for taking your money and reluctantly giving some of it back and still pocketing the excess. That’s legally sponsored extortion. Make a claim and your premiums go up and up. 

 

How is that justified?  That not only applies to vehicles, but to all sorts of insurance. Is it any wonder that there are hundreds of insurance companies and agents. Money for old rope comes to mind, and the law allows it.

 

Our house insurance has almost trebled and a friend’s car insurance has risen to an astronomical £6000 for a year from £1000 odd for the previous year, and he has made no claim during his time with the insurance company.  

 

The following is from the Association of British Insurers website:

None of my circumstances have changed, my car is one year older, and I’ve still not claimed. So why has my motor cover price gone up?

We can understand why it might be frustrating or distressing to see prices rising when key factors such as your no-claims haven’t changed.

But recent premium rises in motor insurance have been driven by a sharp rise in the cost of claims, often at rates higher than inflation.

For example, the cost of vehicle repairs jumped 32%, with the cost of paint increasing 16%, spare parts up 11% and the cost of replacement cars increasing by 47%. These have been largely driven by the price of energy. These factors impact heavily what it costs to pay a claim for a theft or an accident. Paying claims for those customers that suffer a loss is the key part of an insurance policy.

Your quoted renewal price may also be impacted by reform in the way insurers price new and existing customers. See the below question for more details here.

Finally, as your price partly reflects the risks you face of having to claim in the future, it may be that your local area has seen more traffic accidents or thefts recently, which could mean your renewal quote is higher. Or it might be the case that your insurer’s data suggests the make or model of your vehicle has become riskier. Such factors are less likely to change quickly though, so should only account for a part of any changes, compared to bigger factors like inflation. There are also factors unrelated to risk to consider too, covered in our final FAQ below.

 

What they are saying in effect is that the customer pays the increases and the company’s profits are unaffected and consequently go up as a percentage of the increase. Insurance companies never lose money. They pay out on a claim and get it all back from the next set of premiums. Not a bad wheeze. The flimflam they give you about risk is just that, flimflam.

 

So where are we now? Your average law abiding citizen, going about their business ends up paying for everyone else’s bad behaviour in an economic system that benefits the few. The gap between the haves and have nots is widening. It is curious that migrants are fleeing countries that are described by the likes of Mr Trump and his acolytes as shit-holes. They seek to escape the crap that surrounds their lives. What appears to be happening is that the isolationist policies (Brexit – America First and other Nationalist right-wing thinking) is turning this country as well as the United States into shit-holes, which no doubt will soon see refugees going the other way. This current conservative government is doing everything it can to get us there. The very fact that water companies were given a licence to print money without any proper supervision has allowed them to dump crap all over the place.  Stockholders have benefited for years from treating this country like a toilet. Having fleeced the customers since privatisation, am I wrong in claiming that they now want the average law abiding customers to pay to clean up the mess? 

 

Just what has Ofwat been doing? On the website it states: …the website sets out how we will work with others for the benefit of customers of water and wastewater services and wider society in England and Wales both now and in the future.

 

So why have things got so bad people have to be warned not to go in the water because it can kill you, or certainly make you very sick? The web site also states:

Our strategy sets out our three strategic goals: To transform water companies’ performance; to drive water companies to meet long-term challenges through increased collaboration and partnerships; for water companies to provide best value and outcomes for customers, communities and the environment, now and in the future.

 

When does that start? Ofwat was formed on April 1^st, 1989. I guess it was an appropriate date and they have been fooling us for the last 35 years. Is it any wonder I find it difficult to sit down and write about nice things, and not go off on a rant every 5 minutes. Enough for now and perhaps more of this anon. I need to go to the loo.

A POINT OF VIEW

There is a program on BBC Radio 4 entitled A Point of View which features the view of a variety of people in the public sphere. I think it might be worth a listen to this podcast at: 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m001xfxk

It's only 9 minutes. You may haver to register and sign in to the BBC iPlayer to listen to the program - assuming you can get the BBC on line in the US

John Nicholas Gray (born 17 April 1948) is an English political philosopher and author with interests in analytic philosophy, the history of ideas, and philosophical pessimism. He retired in 2008 as School Professor of European Thought at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

IS IT A QUESTION FREQUENTLY ASKED ?

There appears to be an outcry against smart phones. In particular ‘parents’ are worried about the effects of mobile phone usage by children and teenagers. On a more political business level, the United States Government is suing Apple in an antitrust iPhone monopoly lawsuit. It is claiming that the company has illegally prevented competition by restricting access to its software and hardware. “Apple has maintained its power not because of its superiority, but because of its unlawful exclusionary behaviour” according to US attorney general Merrick Garland.

 

So on the one hand, excessive and addictive mobile phone usage is causing deep psychological and behavioural problems in children and teens, and on the other, exclusivity by one manufacturer is restricting other companies from greater competition and proliferation of mobile phones.

 

Indeed, the usage of mobile phones has dramatically changed a lot of human behaviour and social interaction. The increasing technical capability of mobile phones, from simple phones to include voice messaging, then text messaging and on to internet connectivity and a variety of video connections (face time, WhatsApp etc..) has indeed been a technical revolution which has dramatically changed social interaction. The drive to combine computer innovation with personal communication and enhanced capabilities has been relentless.

 

Before any of this got going, I can recall reading the ‘funny papers’ and marvelling at Dick Tracy’s two way wrist radio which began in 1946.  Now, we have the smart watch which seems to be an even more compact personal computer. The implanted chip may well be on the verge of making us all cyborgs.

 

So where do we go from here? There is no doubt that the addictive effects of the smart phone are causing significant disruption and changes in our behaviour, and not just in children and teens. Sleep patterns and other aspects of our behaviour have been modified. How did we manage before the proliferation of mobiles? It takes an effort to remember. The telephone box or kiosk in stores, on the street, at airports and railway stations were prolific. The dial was eventually changed to push button and the method of payment and connection was simplified. Can you remember “Push button B” or was it A? Some people could somehow tap the cradle buttons and get connected for free. All very different now.

 

As to meeting up with friends, arrangements were made in advance or one just turned up. It was a more fluid and clearly more interactive approach to relationships. One spent more time with friends and relations in person, out of necessity and circumstance. Of course one could spend a lot of time on long phone calls, but that was more to do with distance and with close friends and family. It was also in addition to personal contact.

 

The telephone was usually on a table in the hall. The long lead, the extension and multiple phones around the flat or house came along for convenience and increased usage. So far as businesses were concerned the installations of multiple lines and switch boards were introduced. There were many operators and an information service along with telephone directories galore. So much paraphernalia and many people were involved with telephones. When one called one always spoke to a person. It took a while before the answerphone was introduced but one would generally speak to a living being. On the whole, the telephone industry employed a lot of people and became widespread multinational public as well as private companies.  In any event it was all people. First and foremost we interacted with people.

 

Much has changed. Now any interaction with organisations is met with interrogation and instruction by a voice telling us what number to tap, or what to say, with advice to go on line in the first place. The website should be the first port of call with its list of frequently asked questions, none of which are the one you want to ask. Also one no longer taps buttons, one speaks or swipes across an image. The style and method of interaction has dramatically changed.  The days when people walking down the street, talking to themselves and gesticulating, might be considered in need of help, have become an everyday fact of life. One does have to admire the dexterity and skill which some people - generally the young - demonstrate when texting. Of course the language we use has significantly change. When did access and impact or text become a verb? One used to have access to something or make an impact on something or someone and write a text or send a message. We now access, impact and text all over the place.

 

In any event, people being born into this world have an entirely different perspective and approach. Much of it seems to be great cause for concern. Children are apparently becoming more isolated and perhaps actually less communicative despite the ease with which they can communicate through their smart phones. They are also prone to be influenced in a negative way by the myriad of stuff that comes through to them because so much of it is crap and deeply worrying. Sadly, the scams, bullying and scatological material is as prolific as the very valuable information that is also available on the net. Unfortunately, the sad character of a great number of human beings has led to the creation of the dark web and hacking. All of this has given great cause for concern.

 

Controlling and policing the internet is extremely problematic. Blocking and editing material is far more difficult that one can imagine. The difficulty of using technology to control technology has become apparent. To attempt to ban and control the use of technology in any way is equally problematic. Making it illegal for children to have smart phones is not a solution. Because of the rather sad nature of our society and for matters of safety, for a child to be able to contact a parent or call for help in an emergency is perhaps something of a necessity.

 

The tragedy is that the use of the internet has become a weapon in the hands of some people. One finds oneself thinking about it as one does about the use of guns in the United States.  In the absence of being able to ban guns, because of a constitutional amendment, many citizens speak of “responsible gun ownership”. It is only a matter of teaching people, and children in particular,  how to look after guns and use them ‘responsibly’. What on earth does that mean?  

 

Should we now be speaking of teaching responsible use of the internet in the hope that the phishing and other forms of scamming and negative social engineering will disappear? How far can one legislate and criminalise internet activity without massive infringements of civil liberties and damaging political social engineering as well. I feel for the parents whose anxiety over their children’s stress and anxiety apparently brought about by the proliferation of smartphones, is overwhelming. I heard a mother this morning, on radio 4’s Today program, seeking to find a way forward and trying to set up a group or lobby of parents to find a solution. It only adds to one’s own stress and anxiety.

 

I confess I spend a lot of time on the internet. I enjoy the stuff I find surfing around the web. It keeps my 80+ year old brain engaged. It can be very helpful as well as deeply frustrating when dealing with officialdom; but on the whole, it’s a great invention, despite the number of scams and chicanery all over the place. One can be alert to these things. As an instance in point, when you get an email informing you that a package has failed to be delivered and you are not expecting any such package, how did the delivery firm, you’ve probably never heard of, know your particular email address? Not difficult to work out it’s for the bin. Yes there is a lot of it, and of great concern, but there is so much more to enjoy and to share.

 

I do not know what the solution is. That education should make the difference is a given, but education, like stiff sentencing for deterrence, has made little difference in world affairs. The problems in Middle Europe, the Middle and Far East, and the African continent are all conducted, discussed and debated by educated people who cannot seem to find common ground and closure of hostilities. It is not so much that one must make children aware and to beware of scams and chicanery, one must make children not want to become mendacious scammers, thugs and bullies. With the likes of Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and, yes, Boris Johnson and others, so easy to spout lies and give voice to delusions, is it any wonder that some think it’s ok to behave in that way.

 

But if you want a bit of diversion and cultural education in the artistry of writers Billy Wilder and Charles Brackett, director Mitchell Leisen, producer Arthur Hornblow Jr under the banner of Paramount Pictures go to this site: https://ok.ru/video/3084433033961

 

Called Midnight, it was released in 1939, the same year as Gone With The Wind and Wizard of Oz to name but two in that extraordinary year which took the world into quite another era from which I believe we are still recovering. Anyway it’s worth an hour and a half of your time. You won’t regret it. You’ll like the acting as well.